 Good job the hour 1230 having arrived let's get a we'll call this meeting to order and let's get a roll call thank you mayor council member of Newsome present Brown here Watkins here Brunner present Calentary Johnson present vice mayor Golder here and Mayor Keely here having established a quorum to do business we will move into closed session our closed session we have several items on this let me ask mr. Kandadi do you wish to make an announcement before we go into closed session okay anybody else any comments before we go into closed session miss Bush any questions comments normally you would call for public comment but we have nobody anyone with us wish to make comment on any of the closed session items that appear here seeing and hearing none we will go into closed session we will return after our work and we will have a 2 p.m. afternoon session of the City Council recording stopped the hour of 2 o'clock having arrived the January 24th 2023 afternoon session of the Santa Cruz County City Council excuse me the Santa Cruz City Council will be in order let's have a roll call council member of Newsome present Brown here Watkins here Brunner present Calentary Johnson present vice mayor Golder here and Mayor Keely here having established a quorum we will begin our business this afternoon no announcements from the presiding officer statement of disqualifications yes sir we'll get that fixed we're good thank you very much for those of you that were listening we had the call to order we had a roll call all members are present there are no announcements by the presiding officer we are on statements of disqualification any member have a disqualification they need to announce at this point seeing and hearing none we will move ahead city attorney a report on our closed session good afternoon Mayor Keely and members of the City Council the City Council met this afternoon in closed session at 12 30 p.m. in the courtyard conference room to discuss three items of closed session business item one was a conference with labor negotiators council met with its negotiating team concerning the police officers Association police management and SEIU temporary employees item 2 was real property negotiations council met with its negotiator Bonnie Lipscomb economic development director to discuss real property negotiations properties at 902 Pacific Avenue and 333 front street an item relating to that is also on your consent agenda this afternoon as I'm 12 I believe item 3 was a conference with legal counsel concerning existing litigation council met with its city attorney and discussed the item Lisa Lopez at all versus the city of Santa Cruz early pending in the Santa Cruz County Superior Court as well as in the sixth appellate district there was no reportable action on any of those items thank you moving on we are on the council meeting agenda item four does any member wish to either review or revise any portion of our future agenda items at this point thank you we're on the consent agenda let me first see if members have questions or comments on the consent agenda Ms. Callitari Johnson on item 10 please proceed on your question just a comment this is the city council ad hoc housing elements subcommittee thank you mayor Keely and councilmember Newsome for joining me on this ad hoc committee it should it pass today I want and I look forward to working with you I look forward to working with planning department staff I wanted to add that although it's not articulated in the report that this ad hoc subcommittee should it pass today will be integrated in the work of the staff housing element committee that's doing the work and the stakeholder outreach that has been outlined in previous agenda reports thank you further on that item thank you I want to associate myself with Ms. Contari Johnson's comment which from my point of view is making it clear that this ad hoc subcommittee will be engaged in scheduled public forums and venues so that that ad hoc committee is receiving public input as well during this process and thank you for being the author of this item bringing it forward others on this item anyone else on this item okay other items items items please go ahead I just have a brief comment on 16 16 that is the children's fund oversight committee bylaws I just want to thank our staff for putting these together and I know it's a new process in terms of outside of kind of our regular scope of doing things but I really appreciate the way that it was formatted and framed in a way that I think will hopefully move the needle in terms of processes for the actual committee members and I'm honored to serve on the committee and look forward to getting to work so thank you for your historically good work on this other items on consent Ms. Brown yes thank you mayor I think I would like to like to pull item 17 I think that there are some questions I'm 17 will be pulled and we will take it up at the end of the consent agenda calendar and I also do have some concerns about the the about item 15 and I'm hoping we can discuss that to provide a little bit more direction and I don't know if that would require pulling it based on what I'm hoping to accomplish but maybe on the safe side I'll go ahead and do it let me see if what we can do on that I I don't know what others might have but I have a question on this too I think I can handle it under this but we'll see if you think that okay great all right good others others on the consent agenda others on the consent agenda sir I do have a comment on item seven seven and your comment is sir yes this is an item to consider a motion to approve an annual merit increase for the city manager in the amount of five percent of base compensation under the requirements of the Brown Act I'm required to orally report that this would result in an adjustment in the city manager's base compensation from twenty three thousand eighty six dollars and ninety six cents per month to twenty four thousand two hundred forty one dollars and thirty one cents thank you other questions or comments on consent me see on item fifteen which is to schedule a general plan map amendment for certain properties along Leonard Street having spoken with the relevant staff on this I would like to have the motion read as follows on that item when we take it up motion to accept the report regarding the schedule for the proposed general plan amendment semicolon and comma indicate to staff that the discussion on page fifteen point three entitled downtown expansion plan is the preferred option of the city council without prejudging the recommendation from staff at a later date when they return with this item and the purpose of this is that there are three paths outlined to us by the city planning staff and there in discussions with the neighborhood it seems that their desire is to do this in conjunction with the downtown expansion plan as opposed to either the other alternatives but we don't want to prejudge that but we do want to say it's our preference based on what we know at this point without objection such will be the order without objection please can you clarify what you're stating just now about that item I'm not clear oh so there are three paths to take care it intended to take care of the concerns of the folks in the Central Park neighborhood staff's been absolutely wonderful about working with them to get to a place where it looks like one of these three paths might work it seems as if in discussing this with both the neighbors and city staff that they would have different cues associated with them they would take different periods of time to get this done and the one that seemed the most expeditious by the neighbors was the item on page 15.3 that I mentioned that that approach staff will still they understand our preference if this passes they will come back with with an analysis about which way to go on this but we're stating at this point we believe that the neighbors are on the right path of the three that are available we'll get more information later on we may change that but at this point we're giving a nod in the direction of the downtown expansion plan. I have a question then are you is any anything happening with this item in terms of the consent agenda or is it remaining in the consent agenda? Yes yes okay my understanding is that this item was to accept the report and we weren't taking any action on the item other than in the consent agenda it's an accepting a report of this item right not an action on one of the three paths. This is I would say this is a tweener if I had to say. A tweener. Which is to say that we are providing additional guidance to the planning staff it is not a motion to accept one of those paths and stating a preference based on what we know at this time. I have a question for staff then on this item. Certainly. Hi. Good morning Mayor and Council members. So my understanding in this item in our consent agenda it's to accept this staff report outlining the reallocation of the residential parcels at Leonard Street into one of three options and that you've outlined in that path in that report and so my understanding is it's accepting that report that that staff is looking into those three options and in the future we will be at a place where we might have to make a decision in terms of direction on one of those three paths but not as it states currently in the consent agenda. Thank you Councilmember Brunner. I'm Lee Butler, Director of Planning and Community Development for the City and yes the way that we put it in the agenda report was that there are three options in that we would look at the most expeditious way to bring the items the general plan amendment and associated rezoning for the Leonard Street three properties that are affected to the Council in the most expeditious manner. The way that the mayor is suggesting that there's a preference for the downtown plan expansion we think that that's likely the the approach that is going to be the most expeditious but that that also meets the minimum threshold requirements of needing to have a equivalent or greater increase in residential capacity that matches or is greater than the decrease in residential capacity that's being proposed on those three Leonard Street parcels and so we're fine with that approach that we that we have the preferred approach of the downtown plan and what we would do is as we proceed things change at times right you you may have a comment that comes in from the community that requires additional analysis or that changes the timeline for a project and so if we are going to look at if we see that an alternative approach say for example the Ocean Street Area Plan would accomplish this in a manner that gets those items to the Council ahead of time ahead of what the downtown plan would and we would report back to you on that and say look here's what's changed we think that this is the more expeditious approach at this point and then that would be before the Council at that alternative time but we do think that the downtown plan right now is is likely that the expansion there is likely the most expeditious route we just we don't want to necessarily preclude those other ones and I didn't hear that in the mayor's changes there that the other approaches wouldn't be precluded it's just there's given preference to the downtown plan approach and if there are changes we would report back I guess I'm not I didn't make myself clear because I understand this item and all of those options that staff is looking into I wasn't sure what the mayor was doing with this item is the mayor taking this item and providing direction to or because I understood it as we're accepting this items in here as a report to accept this is what staff is at with this item I know I had I was at the meetings at Leonard Street with the neighbors last year and I've had several communications with our planning staff Sarah Noisy about this item over the last several months so I understand the item I'm questioning the what it started with Councilmember Brown on number 15 and then all of a sudden the mayor was saying something about 15 and I got lost so I was just clarifying what was happening with 15 thank you it can't may I just do you feel like your questions have been answered no okay so it may be more expeditious than if there's a procedural concern to pull it and then because this is something that I was gonna basically I mean I had intended to talk about the conversations I've had with the neighbors their interest in us expressing a preference for the density transfer that would be required to happen through the downtown plan we believe it's the most expeditious so I was intending to say something about that and that's why I raised my hand it sounds like Mayor Keely has also thought about a way to achieve this but if it if there's a procedural let's hear or something that is of concern I could we could pull it and I can make the motion and do it that way but we're just trying to say just ask the council is it do we want to express a preference for this in response to the neighbors and our sense of what the different processes entail I get it now okay thank you you okay with keeping it on consent with that change okay so now with what change the change that I I'll read it again for you so take a look on page 15-1 motion to accept the report regarding the schedule the schedule for the proposed general plan map amendments I would add semicolon and comma indicate to staff that the downtown expansion plan approach appears to be a preferable option comma without prejudging recommendations from staff when they return to the council on this item I'll let a council member Watkins council member Watkins no I appreciate that I appreciate the modification you made because I felt like the 15.3 specification wasn't clear so I feel having the clarity around the dance that explicit explanation around the approach for the downtown expansion is more clear for our staff and for the community when reading the note so I think it's kind of to a council member Brunner's question I think it's a bit of a both and in a an acceptance of a report and a somewhat direction and preference of the council to move forward in a in this unique specific way so given that I'm if unless there's more questions that council member Brown had to have wanted to ask I'm comfortable with leaving it on consent it's it and I'm comfortable leaving it on consent I just I think all three should be explored by staff so I'm you know to state that that's the preferred preference of the neighbors and and appears at your language I don't know if Bonnie has that city clerk has that available that added language but it appears to be the most expeditious path great we can I'm fine having that in there as as a change to item 15 thank you thank you for clarifying that thank you for having us clarify let me ask anything else on consent okay let's take up item 17 miss Brown you asked to discuss this item so I I actually think it may well I don't know that we need to pull it but I did have a number of questions that I compiled and sent to staff and I apologize it was not in a timely fashion took me a while to curate those those questions and so I wanted to see if we could get hear from staff about this item there were many questions in the community related to kind of in several categories one being a concern about how this interfaces with past work similar work and monitoring on the river in those locations and then in addition the question about how the results might change based on where the the monitoring is happening in the potential diversion so mr. Babatola thank you for being here and sorry it was last minute the questions came it would be great just to get you know a very quick explanation of what this is that you're proposing and why I think it would be helpful for members of the public listening and you can explain it better than I can so we are asking you can if I could just have you speaking to the mic okay so we're asking the indulgence of council to allow us to apply and receive a grant from the state on non-point source water control water quality control issues as background San Lorenzo River has been under what is called a TMDL or bacteria specifically and for some other pollutants since 2011 and the city has made tremendous efforts to control sources of bacteria for those who might not know the TMDL is the abbreviation for total maximum daily loading normally that is used under the Clean Water Act to control for water quality in waters that are permitted to receive pollutants however San Lorenzo River was never permitted to receive pollutants except it was receiving pollutants so the TMDL then based on bacteria says the city the county and everywhere the river runs through have the joint responsibility to bring the bacteria levels to what is called wreck one limits those would be a 30 day geometric mean of a species like Antiochoxide do not exceed 32 counts per hundred mls colony counts per hundred mls or a single sample maximum of a hundred and four colonies per colony forming units per hundred mls however it's been impossible for the city and anybody else who's assisted in all those years to reach those limits and the one thing the city is very very good at is a science of the environment of the total environment and we've applied that to the best of anybody's abilities to try to understand why we couldn't the city through its water department through other units including city manager's office and parks and rags employed rangers to move the homeless assuming that there's a quotient of these bacteria coming from encampments along the river over the years I have not measured the cost or number of agents that the city has used but I have measured the bacteria and the bacteria types it has there hasn't been a dent in it the second thing the city has done very well sir might I interrupt you for just a moment because we want to not only do we want to hear but everyone wants to hear everything that's being said we are apparently having some technical audio problems right now if you would let us if we would all recess for a couple of moments while we get this straightened out then we'll go back in session so we stand in recess for hopefully a brief period of time testing one two three testing testing one two three we are back from a brief recess we are discussing item 17 and miss brown had asked for the opportunity to comment and perhaps ask questions on this miss brown you recognized thank you I I did just want to invite Mr. Babatole back to you were you were giving us a little bit of an overview and I appreciate that so you know if there's anything else you'd like to say and I think in particular in the arena of some of the concerns that I've heard about the specific focus on the unhoused population adjacent to the river or just to be brief and to the point the grand proposal has nothing to do with housing or not housing the homeless has everything to do with water quality incentives of river and all the contributors including the house and unhoused will have their contributions sequestered from the river by a technology that's agnostic of the source of it that's what the grant proposal is about that's what non-point source bacteria controls about if you were able to focus on a population it would no longer be non-point source some other agency would be giving that grant so this is not directed at or against what however is evident is that if in fact there were measurable significant contribution from the unhoused population of course the devices would capture them just like it would capture the ones from broken sewer lines thank you further on this item and make an observation thank you for that response I will make this observation have when I had the pleasure for eight years of serving as a Santa Cruz County supervisor I represented the Fifth District which has the headwaters of the Santa Renta River in it and probably 15 16 miles of the 20 miles of the Santa Lanza River runs through the Santa Renta Valley and the district I represented we spent decades on the issue of fecal coliform failure of septic tanks failure of leech systems and that I believe I'm led to believe that that is still the major continuing source of pollution the Santa Renta River is the septic systems in the unincorporated area and the state regional water excuse me the regional water quality control board imposed a number of standards on that with regard to septic systems leech fields etc and it is still the major contributing factor to pollution in the Santa Renta River having said that I do think that this does in fact point directly at folks experiencing homelessness it says it in the item it says it repeatedly in the item and so we should not pretend that that's not what it says it does say that and the degree to which folks who are experiencing homelessness that that is contributing as any other contributing component part should be addressed it is not the people that we are unhappy with about this it is the pollution to the river whatever the source is whether you've got 10 acres in the Santa Renta Valley and you still have a lousy septic system that's running into the river that should be addressed the same way this should be addressed but what shouldn't happen it seems to me is and this was one of the lessons learned through the council advisory committee on homelessness and that is that it is important to deal with behavior not status and I would imagine that you would agree with that I do entirely they I think there's a distinction between the question that I had read through council member Brown and what the mayor is saying is we have not been able the city staff have not been able to do anything outside of city limits and those septic fields are totally outside of the city limits and as I said earlier the TMDL is imposed on all of us there is a need to either formulate a watershed based plan or somehow engage all the other areas that contribute to the river to do something similar what we can do and what this grant focuses on is control the sources controllable sources within city limits that have shown high bacteria with high human associated discharges that is caffeine and DNA hf 183 those things we can do but like I said those don't say they're coming from the homeless or the unhoused they'll treat them the same way thank you come in yes if I may Tiffany wise bus sustainability and climate action manager to your point mayor this grant proposal originated as actually a countywide partnership going beyond our city limits in the watershed to address some of those things that you spoke about we realized soon on though that the county didn't have capacity nor did they have their project fully scoped as we did so we proceeded on our own for this I just wanted to add that bit of context because this has been a collaborative endeavor and in fact we have embarked upon an every other month working group with the county on this topic so just wanted to add that as well thank you miss wise West appreciate that and all the other good work that you folks do further on the consent agenda we have public hearing consent agenda item we have to vote we will we'll get there we'll get there trust me we'll get there it's our motion on the consent agenda and then we have public comment public comment on the consent agenda seen in hearing none online do you have someone let's go I can I was trying to comment on item 17 about the water Clean Water Act I just sort of wanted to make the point that if what we're trying to do is specifically target sanitation concerns from homelessness impacts in the river it seems to me that this money would be best used on opening up public restrooms having more shelter away from the river I think that the sort of focus on this is some sort of abstract climate or clean water or like environmental plan doesn't really make much sense because it's strange to frame it as like a lot of the problem is caused by homelessness but then to suggest that we don't address the root issues because people are going to go to the bathroom somewhere and then if you have like you have in farms with like cow manure drain off right it gets into rivers and streams you're gonna have the same problem if they go to the bathroom somewhere else that is also not a bathroom so it's like I feel like there's like a missing sort of understanding of the context of this issue and how it sort of relates to just people needing infrastructure but yeah I'll let you guys sort of respond to that if you want thanks. Thank you. Good afternoon sir. Good afternoon Council. Good afternoon Mayor. Public comment. My name is Liam McLaughlin I'm a resident of City of Santa Cruz district 4 I'm also the political organizer as many of you know for SCIU 5 to 1 city workers and on behalf of the workers they wanted me to come and give comment on item number 7 the merit increase of 5% to the city manager not in support or an opposition but just wanted to one provide some perspective and to make a request the perspective is that you know as you all know you're currently in negotiations with the part-time temporary workers and last year during negotiations these workers had to go on strike right the first time in Santa Cruz City history to get a 4% COLA this year right and they're continuing to try to work with you guys in the next coming months to get everyone up in the class and class really appreciative of your your efforts there but that perspective being you know these are the guys who the last couple weeks literally saved our city public works water department wastewater and they got a 4% COLA and they had to fight every tooth and nail to get that so that's the perspective I want to provide and then the request is just that in the same with the same grace and with the same kind of recognition of the city manager's value that you're giving with this 5% increase I hope you bring that same grace and recognition to the city workers and their value not only the temporary negotiations but also the upcoming class and comp negotiations so thank you Mr. Laughlin thank you very much sir someone else online hello I was calling because I wanted to also comment on consent item number seven I'm showing that currently Matt Huffaker makes two hundred and sixty six thousand and three hundred and eighty eight dollars per year I don't know what everybody there gets paid in their normal day jobs but I know that's a lot more than I get paid and more than almost anybody I know gets paid and the idea that he's just gonna get a 5% merit increase and it's gonna go through the consent calendar you guys aren't even gonna debate it you're not gonna talk about it you're just gonna push it on through is pretty frustrating because with the economy as it is I don't see anybody else getting a 5% raise without even a discussion about it also I just want to remind the council that during the storms the Civic Center was opened and it was closed down in the middle of all the storms with more atmospheric rivers coming and it was closed by Matt Huffaker personally and he said it was because he the city couldn't afford it and so if we can't afford to take care of our most vulnerable when there are you know I mean that we haven't seen storms like this since 82 right like these were a big deal and he was fine putting people on the street but then he wants to get a 5% increase to his already very large salary I think it at the very least it warrants discussion among the council and that is not just be on the consent calendar to be pushed through in this way so thank you for your time and I appreciate it thank you very much mission record good afternoon everybody I also had comments about number five and I hope you don't take this personally but I just to echo what Liam said and oh sorry seven thank you and what the caller just just said you know our lowest paid city workers with all the struggles they went to through to get a better contract the lowest paid workers are getting less than a hundred dollars a month in their pockets on you know they make a ridiculously small amount of money already for incredibly hard work and a hundred dollars doesn't go very far at all especially when you have a family so you know like proportionality like we I think all of us hold as a value that we want more egalitarian more equal culture city we don't want people to suffer but you know how we choose to spend our money and our budget does cause some people to suffer so there's that and then just on item 17 with the grant for the river so the filters that are going to be put in seems so cool and I think that's really really wonderful I read the staff report and the summary sheet twice and there seemed to be a little bit of like so like a language discrepancy between them where in the one pager it talked about extra toilet facilities but in the application itself it didn't and only talked about the education component and I agree with other people that that actually having more sanitation and waste services more consistently is essential along with education but education is like a little icing on the cake in my in my opinion and and just the way that these that these staff reports are written and again no shade on our public works department that who work very hard but but the way the language that's used especially like for me reading these documents I get a little triggered and so when I'm reading them I feel like it's hard for me not to jump to conclusions that it's like just hating on people that don't have housing or being discriminatory and I would I would love it if if whenever anybody is writing report they are attuned to the way that the language that they use may feed into the public's feelings that people who are unhoused may be causing more environmental harm or criminality in our communities when that may not be the case thank you thank you miss bush and my name is Laurie Egan I am the executive director at the coastal watershed council calling in to comment on item number 17 in support of the grant proposal that city staff have put together here for this 319 program I think what's most important to note is that this grant program exists to help monitor and control sources of water pollution so while there are a tapestry of solutions that we need as a community to support people experiencing homelessness this these grant funds are earmarked specifically towards this water quality purpose it's important to monitor and address human source bacteria which is a significant risk to public health and polluting our waterways and perhaps something that we can know here is that the city of Santa Cruz has worked hard not only to put forth this proposal to monitor human sources but has done a lot of work around our housed community and addressing those sources of controllable solute controllable bacteria specifically in our sewer lateral so the city has been doing a tremendous amount of work on this topic and the coastal watershed council is in support of this proposal thank you very much any others miss push okay having completed public input on our consent agenda let me get a motion to approve the agenda vice mayor and miss Watkins make the motion and the second those let's get a roll call vote please can I just confirm a couple of things is this including item 17 that was pulled yes I didn't actually I was maybe gonna pull it yeah and then it's the motion language amended for item yes okay that include the change that council member Newsom aye Brown aye Watkins aye Brunner aye Calentary Johnson aye vice mayor Golder aye and Mary Culey aye motion passes and so ordered we are on the consent agenda public hearing item 19 is there anyone with us who wishes to comment on item 19 it is an extension of an urgency ordinance relating to accessory well dwelling units and other related matters seen and hearing no public comment I have somebody I'm please do good afternoon good afternoon okay one more good afternoon okay we're back matters back before the council do we have a motion to approve item 19 as submitted motion by miss Watkins second by all kinds of folks but we are going to accept Ms. Calentary Johnson as the second of that motion can we have a roll call please council member Newsom aye Brown aye Watkins aye Brunner aye Calentary Johnson aye vice mayor Golder aye and Mary Culey aye motion passes and so ordered we are on item 21 on our regular agenda this item is is brought to you excuse me I'm sorry item 20 which is a motion to accept the existing building decarbonization roadmap do we have a brief presentation on this yes it's not necessarily brief however but we do have a presentation apologies for that delay I'm Tiffany wise was the sustainability and climate action manager for the city of Santa Cruz and I'm here to share with you today council our roadmap over the next year over 2023 to pursue equitable existing building decarbonization I want to acknowledge TRC which is our consultant group who's on the line will assist in this presentation specifically Rupab singlet the senior project manager and we also have Farhad Faraman who's the associate director of energy policy there has been quite a bit of state work to assist I also want to acknowledge the NAACP who worked with us for eight months over last year on our work as well as the planning department both the advanced planning division and the building division are we are all working together on this effort I have a lot to share with you today there are a lot of questions on this approach many of which I can answer some I may not be able to but hopefully at the end we'll have that opportunity so to get right into it we want to share with you today what the city's learned over the past year since we've been working in this space want to share a timeline to evaluate policies before we bring to you a policy for adoption I also want to note that the word decarbonization really means energy efficiency plus electrification energy efficiency first so that we're conserving energy so we don't have to oversize our electrified appliances everything I'm sharing with you today is based on peer reviewed studies Santa Cruz specific data engagement that we've conducted in real-world experience to remind you our climate action plan for the various greenhouse gas emissions sectors that are regulated by the state about 24% of the emissions are related to building energy use both in commercial energy and residential energy and the majority of that is natural gas usage you can see on these pie charts that are both residential and for non-residential buildings space heating and water heating constitute by far the largest use of natural gas in the home so or in buildings rather so why do we want to electrify central coast community energy is really the key here it is a non-profit locally led electricity provider that procures electricity for our region and is on track to meet 100% renewable electricity by 2030 they are a big supporter of this initiative one of the other things not only in having clean electricity is that the more clean electricity that we can procure the faster we can decommission dirty natural gas power plants and in fact central coast community energy is ahead of schedule right now they're at 60% renewable energy two years ahead of schedule and as I said we'll be ramping up to 100% renewable electricity by 2030 just to remind you our climate action plan has three measures related to building decarbonization existing building decarbonization number one is to electrify about a third of our existing residential building stock by 2030 and a little over half by 2035 and then also to electrify about a quarter of our existing commercial buildings by 2030 and 45% by 2035 we also call for increasing resiliency through equitable energy efficiency implementation together these all support our two targets from our climate action plan one is a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2030 and an aspirational target of carbon neutral by 2035 how are we going to get there with these building decarbonization measures we really envision parallel tracks here phase mandatory reach codes that are heavily incentivized and voluntary electrofit which is the term we use for electrification retrofits incentive programs with our partners so what's a reach code a reach code is a local enhancement to a state code building our energy code it can be adopted at any time it requires a cost effectiveness study to demonstrate that whatever the ordinances that's going forward is cost effective and typically requires approval by the California Energy Commission in addition to reviewing the ordinance also the cost effectiveness study so in our climate action plan I'm not going to read all of these but we do have six different actions that build up to the measures the three measures that I mentioned starting with this electrification ordinance that needs to be adopted according to our modeling by 2023 followed by really focusing in on the affordable housing stock there's a lot of opportunity there by 2024 together if we can achieve the implement these two measures be two and be three are specifically what we're looking at we can reduce 25% of the total emissions needed so that 76,000 metric tons to achieve our 2030 legal target so this really shows you why electrification of buildings is so important and key to our plan I'm going to now turn it over to Rupam Singla who's going to talk further about why electrification makes sense for our community and is part of our state strategy as well so I'm going to turn it over to Rupam right now all right thank you Tiffany so various stages various state agencies have looked into this and have determined that electrification of buildings and vehicles is really the lowest cost lowest risk decarbonization pathway and is really the most readily achievable approach today I apologize sorry about that and this approach the electrification approach is really we're comparing it against other approaches such as biofuels hydrogen capturing methane really electrification is the best path and there are significant cost savings associated with it largely cost savings associated with avoiding gas infrastructure and not having to maintain the gas grid so the CPOC has actually already come up with a five-step approach to decommissioning the gas grid if you could flip to the next slide all right so combusting fossil fuels in our homes leads to poorer quality than using electric appliances and there are tremendous health benefits for moving away from fossil fuels evidence for multiple studies correlates indoor gas combustion stoves with respiratory elements and other health impacts the American Medical Association actually already has a resolution declaring gas cooking a health threat and advocates for increased ventilation and advocates for policies that transition away from gas stoves it's also noteworthy here that California has unfortunately the second highest childhood asthma rates in the country that are pretty primarily attributed to gas stoves move to the next slide another benefit to electrification is job creation so several studies from UCLA and the University of Massachusetts show that jobs gained by the clean energy transition far outweigh those that are that may be lost from the oil and gas sector Newsome's budget for California includes $35 million for displaced oil and gas workers so this includes money for workforce training for well-capping it also includes money for early retirement for some folks that may need to not need to work anymore as well as low-carbon economy development programs and then looking locally at Santa Cruz the city of Santa Cruz actually has partnerships in progress for training and apprenticeship programs which Tiffany could give more details about we'll move on to the next slide and so electrification equipment is already technically feasible to start with one of the main electrification technologies are heat pumps so those are some of those pictured on the left heat pumps are essentially just reversible air conditioners that can provide in addition to cooling it can also provide space heating heat pumps are also the predominant technology for electric water heating for cooking the preferred technologies induction so induction induction works by generating a current in the pot or the pan itself and then for clothes drying there's also electric options clothes drying could be electric resistance or it could be a heat pump in city staff actually did some outreach with contractors last year and found that some potential concerns around found some potential concerns around electrification equipment some of the concerns ranged were economy wide economy wide concerns so they applied a gas equipment as well as electric equipment those are mostly issues around supply chain another frequent issue raised with having a trained workforce that could keep up with customer demand and then just to compare the efficiency of some of these common appliances on the natural gas side a typical efficiency for a new construction natural gas as heating appliance maybe something around 80% for existing buildings existing systems you're looking at something much lower closer than maybe around 50 to 60% that's compared to heat pumps which operated at a 350% efficiency so huge difference and this is really done because it's the heat pumps not actually combusting energy on site it's just moving energy or moving heat from outside to inside or inside to outside resistance and induction technology which could be used for cooking or some high industrial industrial high intensity industrial processes you'll get efficiencies around 100% so when looking at electrification there are several policy pathways that we can consider there are building performance standards time of permit or replacement and time of property transfer so starting with the building performance standards this is a policy pathway that requires proper property owners to report energy use intensity and then to reduce that energy use intensity over time you could also consider a time of permit or replacement policy and this is where applicants that are already pulling a permit for renovation may have to enhance their project with certain efficiency or electrification requirements lastly there could be a time of property transfer policy and this would leverage property transactions to disclose information to buyers such as compliance status with local decarbonization policies ultimately you're you would be most likely to not need just one of these policies but some combination of all three of these so whatever policies we put in place we want to be careful that they promote equity and there are a few key ways that we can do this we can ensure that renters are not unnecessarily forced out of their homes and we can ensure that housing that is currently affordable remains affordable so to ensure that ensure that renters are not unnecessarily forced out of their homes we could identify decarbonization opportunities during planned rehabilitations of affordable housing we could also establish policies that prevent evictions during renovations and then to ensure affordable housing stays that way we could prevent energy improvement costs from being passed down to the renters in bulk and we could establish channels that regularly review for fair and just policy implementation thank you I will pass it back to you Tiffany thank you Rupam with all of this said and all of this equipment there are many available funding pathways right now in fact when we asked our contractors in June of 2022 if they had any experience with ended these funding mechanisms at the time only a third of them had that may be changing however it will cost about $310 million to electrofit our entire building stock we know that we're looking at a quarter to a third by 2030 however suffice it to say that there are lots of funding pathways out there and specifically our resilient Santa Cruz community activation platform is a one-stop shop where people can go to get links to information and all the current rebates that are available and I provide the qr scan tag for anyone in the audience that may want to look into those for example recently the inflation reduction acts high efficiency electric home rebate program provides point of sale discounts covering a hundred percent of installation costs for families that earn less than 80 percent of area median income and 80 percent of installation costs for those that earn between 80 percent and 150 percent of AMI that's just one of many stackable rebates that are available right now including for panel upgrades I just got a quote myself $4400 for a panel upgrade through IRA $4000 rebate that makes it very affordable as far as the activities that have taken place over the last year we and our community partner NAACP participated in eight month equitable home electrification cohort where we learned best practices what other jurisdictions are doing and we're able to start to develop out what you see here today and some of the analysis that we have completed of our existing building stock specifically understanding the stock inventory our electric readiness which I'll share with you and potential costs we have conducted for listening sessions with different types of stakeholder groups including contractors property owners and historically underrepresented underserved folks as well as an education webinar on heat pumps 101 as you can see on the right hand side promoting a tool that helps folks to understand what the cost might be and when the payback is we also have secured funding with Watsonville and central coast energy services to electrify 50 low-income homes but not just to wholly electrify them it's actually green and healthy homes with mold remediation other air quality and so we will be getting about half of those in the city we also recently from our internal carbon fund have allocated funds to deploy an induction cooktop loner program with the library to give folks a feel for what is it like to to cook on really highly controllable induction cook tops we are also working with the regional climate project working groups or partners in the Monterey Bay area we've gotten funds that we're leveraging for more existing building electrification funding by hiring grant writers and strategists to help us with that and then lastly we are we've been continuously meeting our workforce development we're currently scoping a project on that with a number of community partners and to gain our own experience internally we've recently renovated about a dozen of our water heaters to electric in municipal facilities so a lot going on over this last year so what we've learned is that some buildings in Santa Cruz are electric ready meaning they aren't going to require an upgrade ready to plug in play 25 of those residential for space conditioning 15 on hot water for residential and about half of area conditioning or HVAC or commercial the other thing that we know is the rate of naturally occurring electric fits is really low if we just simply relied on time of permit it would take 30 years for Santa Cruz to become fully electric so we know that we need to take an alternative approach to that in addition to that rather I've already mentioned the cost the last thing is that we know that a quarter of housing occupants and we know that again 11,000 of our 24,000 dwelling units are renters and 25 percent of housing occupants are really highly sensitive to energy bills where it can comprise up to 15 percent of their income and we need to be sensitive to that utilizing some of the mechanisms that Roupon mentioned again I really want to emphasize that we really are taking this whole building health perspective with health safety water and energy efficiency first before electrification what have we heard from the community proactive community engagement is really needed on this topic we need to get to people before they go to tankless natural gas water heaters we need to make sure we have something in place or that we know when people need hot water when their hot water heater fails how do they go about doing that and we've also heard more education and training of installers is needed there's concerns about public safety power shutoff which I'll address in just a moment and the large delay in time for PG&E service upgrades and then of course the funding that's needed all of which will be addressed through this process in terms of will electrification reduce resilience or again what happens when a public safety power shutoff happens heat pump water heaters do have hot water for many hours in a power outage also all electric appliances can easily utilize a backup power source and as we look at these various types of appliances you'll note that many natural gas appliances still require electricity for their fans or their ignition and so that's important to remember that while the electricity may go out you may not be able to use your gas appliance or it may be unsafe to do so okay this is the final slide then what is our timeline to bringing policy to you we'll be conducting some community engagement in february and march including planning commission and the board of building and fire appeals we'll also be looking at the affordable housing rehab schedule to see where there's opportunities for electric fits there we would like to have a city council study session in may or june to present the policy pros and cons all that we've learned through engagement and to get direction from council on the policy option to pursue we will conduct additional engagement and then bring that first existing building electrification policy to city council for adoption along with an implementation plan in october throughout that whole time period we'll work with our community partners to define the incentive programs for transition via the policy direction that is our presentation and i'm happy to take any questions that you might have as well as thank you very much that was uh thorough and helpful to see if there are questions by council members miss brunner thank you um we did receive um a couple of correspondence from the public thank you for um mentioning some of those uh concerns and public uh questions that have come up thus far in the process um our community central coast community energy um wrote some very interesting points and encouraged support of of this uh decarbonization roadmap and um one of the other uh uh questions that came up i'm just pulling it up is um from the santa cruz county association of realtors and um their question around um at the point of sale of a home or property um is that being addressed in the process about requirements at the point of sale or at what point would incentives or options be available for a home purchaser for example um to not have certain obstacles in the point of sale yes so that's definitely one of the policy options will be evaluating there is no current ordinance that makes that requirement and anyone that buys a home before or after if we would adopt such a policy in the future is still eligible for the funding that i outlined there are many links to right now great thanks for answering that welcome thank you other questions or comments you mentioned um back up what did you mean by that so um we solar battery uh backup battery is possible um those have been deployed throughout for example when um the public safety power shutoffs were happening those were deployed throughout the wildland urban interface to great success so that's the type of um backups backup battery storage that could be available to run electric loads and homes so it would run on the it would operate on the grid not you're not talking individual homes having those no i'm talking about individual homes there could be some neighborhood scale micro grids that could be a bigger either grid tide or grid islanded type backup power as well that is something else that's called out in our climate action plan but is not something that we're undertaking um at this moment it's a little bit further out in our planning process or in our plan implementation process thank you you're welcome for the questions or comments miss colin tarry johnson thank you for the presentation and your work on this um you mentioned committees and commissions that's part of the engagement process do you know which committees and commissions you'll be uh working with well and is the climate climate resilience i forget the name of it the climate task force and implementing the climate action plan how much work will they do with this i imagine a lot yes so thank you for the question the climate action task force will certainly be involved in this process um they have not yet been seated for for this year but will be uh next month uh in the near term we are going to be visiting the planning commission and the board of building and fire appeals and then later on in the process after we get direction from council the study session in the late spring early summer will also be visiting other commissions um to get their feedback as well okay there has been a lot of community interest on this topic and people have asked how can i stay engaged and how can i stay involved um sounds like these commissions you named would be some good places for folks to go to and it sounds like there's already there's also going to be separate community engagement processes yes we will be doing heavy community engagement on this and be promoting it through all of our various channels we do have a good um email list for this but if folks want to get added to that email list they simply need to email climateactionatcityasanacruz.com okay one last question um uh will we be doing community engagement in spanish yes uh not 100 of it um but definitely there will be some done in spanish um that is part of this process we've already done some in spanish at earth they last year uh we had an earth day event specifically in the beach flats where uh peter bca our beach flats a liaison uh administered surveys to folks down there so we have some good baseline information um but we will be conducting more of course thank you so much you're welcome thank you miss whatkins thank you tiffany it's always great to hear the presentation and hear updates on the great work that's underway and on the way um i'm really excited to hear about the workforce development component as well and i'm wondering if you want to just speak a little bit more about that and if you're coordinating with rosemary at the water department or if there's other ways we can support you in that element as well yes thank you for that question um we have been meeting um with a broad set of partners on workforce development since during covid recovery time so we have had uh over a year that we've been meeting on this topic really trying to understand what one another are doing so we're not reinventing the wheels so that we're doing very complementary work and um yes and this is the group that rosemary uh in the water department uh leads um and uh we're just in a very early stage of scoping a workforce about there are two major funding opportunities coming out from the infrastructure act in the spring that we want to be well positioned for so we're scoping right now early um with a set of partners so too early to say what exactly that will look like but it's likely going to involve apprenticeship training programs um and so forth um and lots of engagement because you know we know we know that that's really needed as well welcome for the questions of comments the recommended action here is to accept the existing building decarbonization road map and accept this presentation is there such a motion i'll make that motion brown moves anyone on in the public wish to comment on this item i do have people online okay let's go thank you decades of social indoctrination degrading the ability to think critically has left most people hopelessly unable to resist the vitriolic opinions of those groomed to be under the spell of fill in the blank mass formation psychosis the blank could be kovat ukraine iraq afghanistan vietnam or it could be the climate change narrative fear and power are the mechanisms of control conformity researchers told us average people will obey authority without question even when they know their actions are causing pain and make little objective sense authorities know this you don't have to be religious to know there exists good and evil they may well necessarily be part of the fabric of the universe there's plenty of capacity for both of that and both and all of us when you have 30 percent of more of the population as true believers of for instance the coveted theology or the immediate climate climate change existential threat to humanity cult where we must defend ukraine border religion the paid priests of mercenary science the political professional liars the highly compensated mass media campaigners of fear and loathing the censors and the monopoly of big money globalist and corporatocracy self-interested lobbyists have little trouble convincing the other 40 to do almost anything out of peer pressure outright coercion and constant repression of the truth i never trusted the gobless goal of a new world order with tyrannical worldwide totalitarianism coming from davos the who or the ipcc post-covid credible trust should now be gone in our own government the cdc the fda the congress the president and the climate change mercenaries and those who speak their lives i have a degree in electrical engineering but you don't need one to know there's not one scientifically provable climate control benefit that will accrue to anyone in town from the rush sacrifice being asked for in electrification the loss of freedom with no acknowledgement of the risk to the economy our personal finances our well-being or to our energy supply our food supply or the hypocrisy of the current state of green energy or the fact that small changes in temperature are but a fraction of the climate changes the earth has experienced over eons and very dramatically wildly every day and night it is max hubris near insanity to think Santa Cruz can control global climate the rara assurances of those employed in the climate change narrative are demanding sacrifice and cashing checks that they can't possibly deliver the goods on you can't even protect from san lorenzo floods or west cliff erosion damage but demand we sacrifice so you can control the earth's climate the same people that find citizens and created misdemeanors for walking on the beach getting fresh air that don't have to be lacking enforcers of the immoral evil doers in sacramental washington and davos ever again i see a government who no longer minds harming and indeed killing civilians for profit power and control co2 is not a pollutant not cigarette smoke not smog we breathe it out plants breathe it in an assembly bill was just introduced to legalize wealth confiscation that sounds like the same kind of immorality in the last time step to the unborn i'm not for those of you thanks thank you mr philips further comment online honorable mayor kealy this is vicar gomez um government affairs director for the santa christ county association of realtors good to see you folks here online today i just wanted to follow up on my email that i sent earlier today and and thanks staff obviously for their work on this we want to stay closely connected on this topic as your community outreach begins i will go ahead and send an email to that email address to be added to the distribution list but this is an important topic to us and so we look forward to engaging with the city on this topic but in addition to that before we even get to any kind of point of sale mandates i do want to let you know that we also want to be a resource for you on any type of a voluntary program so if our realtors need to be out there educating our new home buyers um in potential conversions whether they're you know voluntary now or mandated later we want to be part of the solution uh mayor kealy and city council so count us as a as a resource we look forward to working with you we look forward to working with your staff as you develop this policy this year and again we look forward to working with the city as you advance this plan thank you mr gomez thank you sir miss bush my name is eric rodberg and thank you for the presentation i think as an aspirational goal building decarbonization is excellent and i appreciate the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions however i think um the presentation left out some very important things currently we don't have the infrastructure to implement this i have i put in an application to i got a building permit to upgrade my electrical panel to 200 amps which is probably the minimum you need to do building electrification and pgne told me uh well it's going to put your neighborhood out of tauren so we'll get back in six eight months to see what we need to do on our side it's already been over six months and they haven't gotten back to me and that's just one little house on the west side of tana cruise and that's just one piece of the infrastructure they don't have the substations they don't have the transmission lines we are just not ready to do mass building electrification and i really think this is putting the car before the force also each one of those items a space heater water heater stove and oven clothes dryer an ev charger that's five separate electrical appliances each one you can't plug that into a regular 120 wall circuit each one requires a 240 volt high amperage dedicated grant circuit and so you're going to have to um you know tear out walls tear out ceilings it's not as simple as just plugging and playing like doctor wise west mentioned in most cases it's very complicated costly and i think there was a lot left out of that presentation it was very slick and professional but on the ground neither pgne isn't ready for it and there's also many potential perverse effects such as during that heat wave this past summer we burned as much as 60 percent this is according to the federal energy information administration 60 percent of the electricity generated was generated with natural gas so if we remove natural gas from the point of use to produce our heat our water heat cooking we're just going to remove move it distant the distant power plants and that is inherently less efficient so i just think that as a matter of aspiration this is great but you need to like if you're on the ground trying to implement that it's a whole nother story and so i i really would oppose any mandate until we have the infrastructure in place one other thing as far as 3ce um whatever they generate we don't necessarily is the gentleman gone was it he's gone okay well thank thank you for your input anyone else miss bush um this is carol polhamas and i want to thank you for taking my call this afternoon and thank you so much for the presentation a little background uh on me i was a early solar panel adopter i have a hybrid that i drive sparingly and i developed and uh created and ran an environmental education and green career training program for high school at risk high school students actually had two of them um in our county for years so i'm not a climate denier and i'm very much in favor of um reducing greenhouse gases so i have a couple of concerns one of them is about central coast community energy i know we were all switched to um that provider with a hope that they would uh be aspirationally getting to their goal to have completely renewable energy but i actually did some research and found that um most of their energy comes from natural gas as eric said earlier 60 percent of our energy comes from natural gas and big hydroelectric plants which are not at all sorry not at all green um so much so that after i did my research i found that peach uni is actually the greener option currently and i switched back i encourage each of you to do your own research and see see what you discover i grew up in florida that was an all electric state is an all electric state and is of course um constantly pounded by hurricanes and storms power would go out people would bring their generators out gasoline generators or diesel generators which are clearly not green during the storms the last couple of weeks my stepkids and then a woman were forced to do the same thing they were without power for four days so i feel like until we have battery storage available for people which we don't um we we're not ready as eric said we're just not ready for everyone to be going to electrification i checked for my little house a battery storage backup would cost 11 000 it's not a small investment most people aren't able to do it including myself so we need to have um opportunities to help you know incentivize people to switch and not create mandates it was ironic to me that during you know the power outages last year governor newton encouraged people not to charge their electric vehicles because we didn't have the capacity so i think you know it's it's great to have a plan it's great to be moving toward but until we have public battery storage and the ability to sustain ourselves when the power goes out we really are not ready for electrification thank you thank you very much miss bush anyone else online good afternoon can you hear me yes good afternoon okay yes good afternoon my name is kandace fran um i'm a member of the east side and east warcy neighborhood uh which is an older neighborhood of mostly thirties and forties homes and i'm also a um three year member of the transportation and public works commission i also as a background have extensive background infrastructure and high tech and data centers and and power source um backup systems um i would also reiterate what the other uh callers said that uh eric and carol in particular um and also noting what i have seen in my own neighborhood where they had to put um very high voltage lines it's quite dramatic change because these are very large pole systems through our neighborhood just to accommodate space heaters and that's the level of our infrastructure in our area and so any kind of upgrade of this nature i would suggest that you start with a pilot project and provide some confidence to specific neighborhoods and identify the uniqueness of those areas because otherwise i would completely agree that we are not in any way set up as an infrastructure also i'm even willing to spend some time and money and effort to quantify what it would take in my own home and i do know that i would have to move some walls and the cost would probably i would estimate to be at least two to three times um what you're projecting i also note as an accountant that you're not projecting for the future cost of money so when you're talking about seven to twelve years out you're really looking at cost or substantially different from what was quoted um in your estimates um so i'm quite willing to work with the city on this um willing to be part of a pilot project and i would really encourage you to really get underneath the numbers i have no confidence that most of people in my neighborhood could afford to do this and i would have to have some confidence that the electrical system itself would remain up in most conditions um especially considering that we've been shut down under even moderate wind conditions so thank you for your time thank you very much and thank you for this proposal thank you very much miss bush further good afternoon hello hi good afternoon yes my name is robert kibrick i live in the city of santa cruz and i've been working to decarbonize and electrify our house uh we put in solar panels we have battery storage we put in a heat pump or space heating um and a couple of observations on this by coming through okay yes okay um one uh the heat pumps are much noisier than a gas furnace uh they're located outside our garage and i think represent a significant source of noise pollution uh we can hear it inside the house with the windows closed and people can hear it if they're walking down the street um so in moving in this direction unless we want to have our neighborhoods become much noisier we need to come up with some standards for uh dealing with the noise from these heat pumps i'd like to second the comments made by other individuals about how our electrical infrastructure is not ready um particularly if you couple the increased demands of electric appliances with electric vehicles this will put a huge amount of stress on the electrical systems particularly the transformers on the power poles that are throughout our neighborhoods which are designed with a duty cycle that assumes that they will cool off at night when electrical demand goes down um and that's not going to be the case if people are charging their cars overnight or running heat pumps at night to keep their homes warm another limitation is the efficiency the heat pump drops off considerably with lower temperatures with nights down in the 30s uh heat pump is at least the one we have which is six years old is is struggling to provide adequate so these are all items that need to be addressed um heat pump water heaters um if you have a heater gas water heater like we do in a hallway closet near bedrooms uh it's simply not at all feasible to drop in a heat pump water heater in its place they tend to cool the air around them and again there's the noise factor so i'm all in support of building electrification and decarbonization i'm trying to do that in my home and finding it's more challenging than i would have imagined and so anything the city can do to try and work with um their residents to help get over these rough stop rough spots uh would be appreciated and coordinating carefully with PG&E to make sure that they make the upgrades necessary to provide the infrastructure needed to proceed with this electrification so i want to thank the council for moving on this and for today's presentation thank you thank you very much one more uh hi mayor kiel hi good afternoon hi mayor kiel this is eric robber you and i don't know why i keep getting so many bites at the apple but um i'll let you move on with your meeting thank you well thank you we're set good anyone else good we have a motion in the second on the floor under discussion seen in here none the clerk will call the roll council member is nuesome hi brown hi what can i runer hi ellentary johnson hi vice mayor golder no and mayor keely hi the motion passes and so ordered we are on item 21 and uh this item is uh if i could take a moment and describe this it seems that once we the voters chose one of two options about how to go to districts uh that we are now in a district environment but we live in the twilight right now which is to say part of the council and the mayor are we're elected in november of 2022 under the new system several of you are continuing your service under the previous system and in two years time or less uh there will be another election and then the entire council will be districted as the mayor continues to be an at-large election so the thought here is to move at least some of our commission appointments that we make of citizens to advisory bodies the idea is to align those with elected council members and the mayor this is not at all unusual in district environments of Watsonville county of Santa Cruz elsewhere and in fact it looks from talking speaking with rather the uh league of california cities as if this is what district cities do as opposed to at-large so the goal here is to move us through a transition period from where we were to making some appointments now based on a to some commissions based on districts and then to complete that transition uh in about two years there's going to be a couple of stragglers if you will that'll be there uh the central concept number two is doing this in a such a way that no one no sitting commissioner is asked or told that their term of their appointment is being cut short everyone who's on a commission nobody's getting replaced on a commission in the sense of uh you are going to uh you have a three-year term four-year term five-year term whatever it is but we're going to shorten that through ordinance uh everyone who is on commissions uh your your term now certainly the prerogative of the city council in making such appointments is that uh there are some absolute vacancies there are others where folks are eligible for another term my way of thinking those are all applicants you may choose to give more weight to someone who served or someone who hasn't those are those are individual choices we will all make but as a matter of policy if we adopt this as suggested today we would begin on our next item in a few minutes to making some of the appointments by district and by the mayor at large let me see if at this stage members have questions about how this would work any thoughts on this okay all right fair enough let me ask if there's anyone with us today who wishes to make comment on item 21 the appointment to city commissions let me ask miss bush if there is anyone online who may wish to comment on this certainly hello mayor kealy can you hear me hello hi uh this is eric robber again and i will take this opportunity to say uh i appreciate the um proposal but i i do oppose it and i oppose it because when we voted for district elections the vote was whether or not to have a uh mayor uh at-large mayor with six districts or else we have seven districts and it was repeatedly noted that this would be a weak mayor city manager for the government as opposed to a strong mayor and it appears to me whatever the intention is it appears that under this proposal the mayor would be getting a disproportionate number of appointments or the current proposals i read it the mayor is getting seven commissioner appointments and i don't think that's right i think the commissions do have real power and can affect real policy change and that so i i think that the mayor should have just the same proportion of the commission appointments as every other council member and if there is some issues with transitioning to fully district elected council then those appointments should be made um proportionally among all council members or the old way where our entire council votes but i think where the mayor gets seven choices council member newton gets four or five and council member boulder only gets one and everyone else gets one i i just think that's wrong and i think it's really against what we voted for when we voted for the mayoral at large system thank you very much thank you very much miss bush anyone else one more good good afternoon yes thank you i preface my harsh comments here by saying i don't think the intent of measure e was to grant the at-large mayor any more authority than prior mayors had or that his vote should count more or vote more often than any other council member the eventual idea here is for newly elected council members to appoint eight commission seats each today it appears the mayor grants himself eight district four appoint six and this gold are only two exclusive commission assignments according to the agenda this mayor first district numerical order priority nomination system is about as fair maybe less than using alphabetical pet names they could have been divided equally at about five nominations each but inexplicably and unjustifiably nope my speculation is this was done as a power play by the mayor and perhaps a chance to appease the loud race card baiting leftists that complained so much in the last meetings the masia dos blanco's high up report we'll see next the retroactive effective date of the ordinance to january first is definitely a gray area unconstitutionally speaking do review that's wearing in oath next the design of the nomination agenda items automatically assuming item 21 will surely pass is an inexcusable mayoral act of mega hubris assumption and obvious told dismissing of public comment and also the other council members in a coercive discouragement of an item 21 may vote if you're taking notes for those not listening court my analysis so far is that this is a bum rush power grabbing farce process unlike district elections no one is suing forcing this item but just like the district election startup there is some unfairness of representation until the commission appointments align completely with this newly elected council member process most of the mayor's reasons for doing this are not worth repeating but the two best of them are to mirror district elections and to build your team ideas i would note though commissioners don't have to live in these districts or even in the city and shouldn't really be working for anyone council member and their mission is also a funnel of the public's will and a bit of a separate authority at times and that respect that can be thought of it sometimes have bottom up organization giving impartial public proxy recommendations the council lacking staffs another issue i do think district elections are superior and resembling a democratic republic than the previous pure democracy system but both of those affirm the superior wisdom of the many over the few or to the one the assumption of a superior wisdom of an individual district's member to that of the entire council on any matter before the council using simple math is a i think about one and seven compared to this proposed interim period for sure you could just as easily have maintained the current fair assignment process while adjusting terms of appointments and reach this suggested process is completed starting condition by 2029 but then the mayor doesn't get four times as many exclusive appointments as miss boulder or any if it were me i'd vote no and table exclusive nominations taking a mulligan to make this an equitable representational process thanks thank you mr philips miss bush anyone else miss brunner i move item 21 with a couple of friendly amendments and i'd like to take a moment to go through that i also want to say thank you for bringing let's do this let's get your amendments out make those then you can speak to them so go ahead what are your amendments so the first amendment is to looking at item 21 to section adding a subsection f as in frank to section 2.40 0.011 and this subsection i sent to city clerk really reflects the work that we have been doing over the past year in the health and all policies committee and i think it's really important i will read the subsection it is in considering their nominations and appointments to boards and commissions council members are strongly encouraged to support diversity equity and inclusion of a broad range of community interests and experiences among appointees in accordance with the city's adopted health and all policies ordinance and adopted work plan including diversity in geographic geography council district age income education level residence status owner renter or unhoused race ethnicity gender and gender identity so i know that was a mouthful but that's one subsection f that i um okay okay so do you have any other amendments there is one more amendment and that is um to uh change the order from a numerical order to a rotating order um within the district so um that it's not always mayor first district four district six but that it is a rotating order of mayor four six four six mayor six four mayor um and so that table is reflected with those suggested um changes so that both of these items reflect an equitable way of um this process so i those are my two amendments and i would like to also um if anyone wants to add to that um in our health health and all policies but hopefully i got that out let's slow down so the first one is an amendment to the ordinance and uh we have the language on that and that would speak to recommendation number two on page fifth 21.1 that would be an amendment to to recommendation number two correct sir now we're going with that first amendment okay that is correct and on health and all policies essentially you want to import that into as a series of lenses through which members would look yes okay uh you seconded and you're friendly amending your own motion so i imagine it's okay with you and and we have a second here so so far so good let me hear the second one again that would amend which portion uh the instead of a numerical order for us appointments um to have it be a rotating order um so this cycle in the table that's given it shows an order of mayor district four district six mayor district four district six mayor district four district six so mayor always has the first choice in that order which i don't think is equitable and so i'm suggesting a rotating order of mayor four six or six mayor got it now i got it yeah okay so that it thank you yes that's so you were the maker of the motion i'm sure it's okay second yep i seconded i'm happy to just make a few comments if i may please do you want to continue to make comments now that you yes thank you and then i'll hand it over to councilmember Watkins um this thank you for bringing forward a new process for us to consider based on this transition from at large council members to district represented council members this is the first time in our history so we're all learning and growing with this and um i just you know reading over this it took me several read-throughs and and um it was really important i for me um because we have been working on commissions and committees over the past year in our health and all policies committee and this kind of beat us to it um and um so you know quickly assembling from that lens and from the direction originally from our racial equity resolution stemmed all of this work and so um i wonder i just you know hope that we might discuss these proposed friendly amendments and um consider them in alignment with this goal of districts representation that you've brought forward and our goal of health and all policies and equity that we um have been working on so thank you thank you miss Watkins i believe you had comments on this yeah i'll keep mine brief because i believe um councilmember pruner really spoke to what the essence is behind the motion and the proposed changes um we just had a city like me report which really highlighted how it takes um intentionality to to be able to actualize diversity and by doing so we want to make sure that we're having that opportunity within our commissions i had the privilege of serving on the commission for the prevention of violence against women for years i had to get sometimes my parents to watch my kids and i had a support system that allowed me to do it and that's a privileged position to be in and i know that others don't necessarily have those supports so by considering how we want to meaningfully and intentionally bringing in diversity this is one of those ways to incorporate it into this policy shift and as um councilmember pruner mentioned this was something that was on our packet of um items to move forward at a future time anyhow so it's a great opportunity and then in terms of the rotation i do agree with that i think that all folks who are elected on a similar cycle um having an opportunity to make the first nomination does feel equitable and i appreciate that modification as well um having been elected at large along with a couple other other of my council colleagues here um you know it is a shift right because there is this mindset around us as being kind of first elected at large around really establishing commissions and committees that are reflected over our entire community and we bring a different perspective and our community voted for districts and the directly elected mayor and so we have to evolve as well and after reading it learning and understanding the benefits of it i'm supportive of this um overall procedural change and um just also know that it comes with uh complexity and nuances that will i'm sure be refined along the way um but given the recommendation brought forward by councilmember burner i'm very supportive in this at this time so thank you mayor very good miss brown thank you mayor i just want to say a couple of things i appreciate the amendments here i appreciate the thought that's gone into um being much more deliberate about how and intentional about how we make these decisions and who kind of um who we bring in and and work with and and i um so i just want to thank you for that as well i want to thank mayor kealy for bringing the proposal forward i uh when i've been on the council uh like um my colleague uh councilmember watkins since 2016 and this idea was raised early on during my first term on the council and it wasn't people didn't really um want to pursue it one council member in particular and i got interested in it um and so i i did do some thinking and some research and um at the time you know we kind of just left it at that point um but you know here we are coming back around and i really try to think about how this um these kinds of proposals will affect our institution you know we can get into the weeds or get focused on um the particulars who's getting a seat on a commission who's not going to get reappointed and you know and that there are some frustration there because they're really good people who are on these commissions who i believe deserve reappointment um and that may not be possible under this new system and we are in a transition period so um you know it it's gonna feel uncomfortable i don't feel entirely comfortable with it um but i what i do know is that i think that institutionally um it will benefit the city it will benefit the city council and it will benefit our commissions insofar as we struggle to engage with our commissions and really to get meaningful recommendation and dialogue with them um so i i feel like this is this is really a way to to work on that and so i wanted to share those thoughts because um you know i i do have mixed feelings and when i think about this institutionally i've decided it really is um gonna be a positive step forward and so i want to thank you all for your your time you've put into it Ms. Contora Johnson thank you yeah i'll i'll echo the um comments of my colleagues i want to thank councilmember Watkins and bruner for your proposed amendments and thank mayor kealy for bringing this forward as was mentioned this is some of the work we're doing in health and all policies and i think this is the right direction to one ensure that we are seeing who's out there in our community um the santa cruz like me report was very telling and so we have a lot of work to do and this is hopefully the first step in in that direction i've had the privilege of serving on commissions and committees prior to becoming an elected and that was a huge learning experience for me so it's a space for individuals in our community to gain new skills and gain leadership skills and it's a it's also an opportunity for us to them be directly connected to experts in the community in the various commissions that we have so i'm really pleased to see it go in this direction as councilmember brown said it is a little uncomfortable changes and always pretty it'll be clunky and we'll just clunk through it together so looking forward to supporting this motion thank you i also want to thank all my colleagues that brought this forward and i um i have to say this this meeting like i mentioned at our last meeting is really hard and how you mentioned at the end when you might end up with 99 enemies i really hope that people that don't get picked tonight become our enemies we do want to continue to work with you and we hope that you will get involved in other ways um and and keep your name active on the list so that um as vacancies open you'll be considered so that's all my very good comments thank you mr newson i just want to echo the comments that were made i really i want to thank mary kealy for bringing this proposal forward and i also i want to thank councilmember brunner and councilmember walkins for the amendments that they brought forward and especially the um health and all policies uh amendment as well and to strongly encourage those who are making appointments to try to use those lenses while they look through the applicants and i agree that you know we were in a transitional period at this point and we are going through change right now and it's uncomfortable it's my you know i'm fairly new to the council and it's uncomfortable to me still uh so but uh you know i i think this is a good step forward and i look forward to supporting this motion thank you thank you very much uh two comments before we move uh if this motion passes which i will support if this motion passes i think we have a two-step process here mr kandadi uh i believe with respect to the ordinance and the amendments there we could adopt those amendments and the ordinance and go to to the subsequent readings as as need be is that correct yes that is correct okay with regard to the first item here's how i would i want to make sure this is consistent with what you're recommending so let's assume for a moment this motion passes as it relates to items 21 at sequitur in our agenda packet today which is to say making nominations and then electing people to these or selecting these people for appointment i would start with mayor for six next item would be four six mayor next one would be six mayor four then we would simply start over again there are going to be some commissions where uh in our packet where they are essentially not by district and so then everyone's in on the nomination process is that consistent with what you want to do am i doing this correctly from your point of view yes that's consistent with my intention very good good great all right click or call roll that public comment oh we have sorry um councilmember newson hi hi brown hi what can i brunner hi parliamentary johnson hi vice mayor golder hi and mayor hi motion passes and so ordered you'll be bringing back uh the ordinance uh at a future date correct sir oh i would we have language that was consistent um prepared consistent with the motion made by councilmember brunner i think it would be appropriate to share with the council at this time i'm sorry i missed what you said i'm not sure i'm clear on what you just was that the the ordinance language is prepared for first reading at this meeting but it should be made available to the public and we can make it available on the screen right here okay i am as amended correct right as amended that's right okay so we have a motion a second and it just passed what do you want us to do now uh i think just for the sake of clarity that the language that was proposed by councilmember brunner has been incorporated into the red line version of the ordinance which is now okay showing on your screen so just so the record is clear on that okay and um there was also a reference in the motion part one to a table that had the order of councilmember appointed spelled out that table would also be amended to reflect the rotating uh that is all incorporated into the motion correct all right so we want that to be clear for the record clear for the record know for the reaction on this for the record correct until there's subsequent times for readings of ordinances and so on it will be brought back for a second reading at your february 14th meeting thank you very much we are on item 22.1 this is the arts commission uh if one of you excuse me well wasn't that convenient uh if uh miss wattkins would be willing to move on behalf of the mayor the appointment of or the nomination of isabel contreras to the arts commission would you make that nomination i'm getting his head shake over here for you clerk yes if mayor if i may typically you can make your nomination and then the vote the council will vote as a whole on your nomination it's not um it's not a motion so you can make it well i can well learn something new every time you preside i would nominate isabel contreras to serve on the arts commission do we have other nominations miss golder do you wish to make a nominates mr newson do you wish to make a nomination uh yes valeria valeria miranda and miss golder christopher car christopher car are there any other nominations seen and hearing none you do have miss bruner i have an additional nomination shon mcgowan all right mr mcgowan any other nominations seen and hearing none the clerk will call the roll well now do you want to change your nomination you made a nomination right okay uh you had nominated mr car is that correct yes i know the other two shon mcgowan i need to know what you want to do what do you want to nominate nicky paterson okay and withdraw who okay mr carno nicky paterson yes so the motion would be isabel contreras shon mcgowan valeria miranda and nicky paterson okay all right clerk will call the roll thank you and i just want to confirm that shon mcgowan will be for a two-year term very good council member newson hi brown bloodkins hi rinner i voluntary johnson i vice mayor golder i and mary kealy i motion carries and so ordered we're on item 23 board of building and fire appeals now this is one which does not fall into the reordered way we make appointments uh there are six available slots on the board of building and fire appeals the floor is open for nominations miss bruner christian nielson christian nielson mcgontar johnson monica ratliff Thomas kern miss golder nominates thomas kern miss Watkins patrick split miss Watkins nominates patrick split miss brown i'll nominate rory howland and that fills it out but that does not stop you from making a nomination if you wish no that's five there's six of them one two three one two three four five six mr schultz was withdrawn that's correct uh scott rogers scott rogers i want to make sure i have this right the nomination the nominees are rory howland howland thomas kern christian nielson monica ratliff scott rogers and patrick split good all right debate or discussion seeing a nearing none clerk will call the roll councilmember newson i brown i watkins i bruner i howland rory johnson i vice mayor golder i and mayor keely hi motion passes and so ordered we are on item 24 the order we will go in is district four district six and the mayor miss golder well we are on the commission for the prevention of violence against women am i right where we all think we are okay miss golder so i i'm sorry excuse me excuse me that's my error mr newson karen madura karen madura miss golder so until yesterday i thought my person that i appointed was still on the commission and so i haven't i didn't review the applications and so i didn't realize that miss olson dropped off and so i'd like to more time more time okay all right uh we will figure out a way to do exactly that and uh mayor nominates eileen fineman so two of the three available appointments will be filled by this motion and then let me ask will you be ready at our regular meeting next time yeah you will be okay so we will agendize for our next regular city council meeting an agenda item for the vice mayor to make a nomination to the commission for the prevention of violence against women without objection such will be the order let's have a roll call on item 24 council member newson i brown i what can i turner i voluntary johnson i vice mayor golder i and mayor eileen i we are on item 25 and on item 25 there are two available appointments to the downtown commission and the order in which we will do this is we will start with make sure we'll start with mr new some we'll start with miss golder miss golder excuse me yeah okay that's okay so um i'm gonna nominate peggy and i'm sorry for butchering her last name dulgenus dulgenus nominated uh and we'll now go to uh yes and uh i will nominate let me let me ask the fourth district uh council member to offer his nomination so we don't double and triple up on some of these sir uh Cynthia matthews and miss matthews is nominated and that leaves one here what i would like to do is uh add to the previous direction on the previous item uh where miss golder was given extended some forbearance to make an appointment uh i would make a similar request can we can i verify with the city clerk that there are three open seats on this only two there's two we're good so if that's the case then i believe it would be the mayor's nomination would be the second one there or not i'm good i'm good with that nomination with the Cynthia matthews nomination i'm fine with that horses appear to be being traded somewhere right here i think i can hear their footsteps all right so the nominees are uh miss dulgenus and miss matthews uh those are the nominees for appointment the clerk will call the roll council member newson hi brown hi what can hi brunner hi elementary johnson hi vice mayor golder hi and mary kealy hi motion passes and so ordered we are on the item uh 26 which is the historic preservation commission and if i have it correct there is one position available now i want to be consistent with what the general lady suggested a few minutes ago and so i want to make sure that i have the right order of who is doing what i do believe that this one starts with the mayor i believe that's how our rotation do you see the same thing in terms of your amended motion maybe bonnie should well we're already thrown off a little bit i think so following the pattern it would be mayor for six on this one i do have to say the table is different from the order we've been going in yes and so that's i think what the table has the rotation order that i made in the amendment mayor for six for six mayor six for mayor that's the one i'm trying to follow here right but we're not going in that order with commissions because the commissions in our um book are by alphabetical and the table goes from arts to downtown commission and skips board of building and appeals so that's where we're but if i've been following my rotation order so what needs to be amended uh like modified is the table because it's not going in the same order that we are going in based on our agenda packet i understand so who do you believe according so i have district four and then yes district four is next for historic preservation commission okay can you confirm um i i guess let me see if i can i need to ask a question about this so on each commission we changed the rotation as opposed to we let's say we start mayor for six and let's say on a commission there were two available mayor four is it your desire on the next commission you start with number six or do you go now to yeah the order continues no matter what the commission is so the rotating order just continues to make it equitable for someone to appoint be the first appointee right but there's two ways you could do that it seems to me and i'm simply trying to yeah let's talk that through let's let's see if we can one way to do it would be let's say we're on the first commission and the first commission has three appointments available and so then it would be mayor four six right now we go to a commission the next item is has uh two available and the order though would be four six mayor correct yeah even though there's only two appointments available the order is three now we go to the third item do you now go six mayor four no okay mayor's clear to me from your yeah the rotation continues you just stay with the rotation yes so that everyone has an equitable chance of being the first person to appoint well fair enough yeah it was unclear to me from the motion that's where you wanted to go is i'm city attorney you're making a face and i just wanted to connect and make sure that um this is an alignment with my motion i thought i was expressionless but um if i understand the way it was just described then if the mayor and district four have an appointment for one body and there are only two seats available then the next round of appointments would be district six yes mayor yes so that you just keep going in sequence you don't just move one seat each right okay i understand that okay so now uh miss colin tarry johnson i have a suggestion sure we we knew this was going to get clunky right um i was going to suggest not to put you on the spot that bonnie helps us move through the order of the rotation and we have one person clunking and not all of us you're nominated well well i'm i'm also i'm happy to have i think i okay trust me on that okay you should trust me on this but do please okay so let's recap where we are right now miss bruner from your point of view doing your the intention of your motion we would be at district four four and then we would start um after that with mayor four six okay fair enough historic preservation commission uh miss golder well it's me i think district four is excuse me mr newson mr newson uh jessie durant say it again uh jessie durant there's the motion there's the nomination rather clerk will call the roll councilmember newson hi brown hi what can i runer hi ellentary johnson hi vice mayor golder hi and mayor kewley hi motion proven so ordered item 27 parks and recreation commission there are two nominations available and if i contract our system correctly it would be myself and miss district four it would be mr newson be myself and mr newson all right mr newson you have nominee you know make a nominee just do it uh nicole strong savage okay and uh i would uh nominate bradley anchel clerk will call the roll councilmember newson hi hi what can i runer hi ellentary johnson hi vice mayor golder hi and mayor kewley hi motion carries and so ordered item 28 planning commission if i track this correctly miss bruner i believe we are on district six followed by the mayor followed by four district six followed by district four fair enough i'll just make a comment that district four has made nominations for the for the past two commissions so this would be the third in a row is that the intention what's your question good we're good it's me first your oh sorry okay um i've been to nominate timory gordon timory gordon and mr newson no it's your it's you oh i will nominate mr pulhamas clerk will call the roll hi hi what can i ron or bruner hi ellentary johnson hi vice mayor golder hi and mayor kewley hi motion carries and so ordered miss bruner what do you think the next are no i just don't want to keep going back and forth what do you think they are i will i will let you it's in your hands the next item is item 29 the sister city there are three members three appointments available i believe we are now back to all six excuse me is this all yes yeah any anyone can nominate on this anyone miss bruner i would like to nominate isabel twinser okay are there nominees i'd like to nominate uh linda snook anyone else miss brown to nominate anita wood and that takes care of our three clerk will call the roll are there any other nominations or no okay no um newson hi hi what can hi bruner hi ellentary johnson hi vice mayor golder hi and mayor kewley hi item 30 motion passes and so ordered item 30 transportation and public works miss bruner what do you think uh district four uh susan gilchrist susan gilchrist says the nominee clerk will call the roll councilmember newson hi brown hi what can hi bruner hi ellentary johnson hi vice mayor golder hi and mayor kewley hi motion carries and so ordered miss bruner what do you think the order is on not what do you think what is the order on item 31 i have six and then mayor thank you miss golder i know excuse me yes miss golder for water yes uh mahi duncan maryl and the mayor nominates here ryan um clerk will call the roll um councilmember newson hi brown hi what can i bruner hi ellentary johnson hi vice mayor golder hi and mayor kewley hi motion passes and so ordered uh two things one is thank you for your forbearance i think you all did a very nice job of feathering this together and making it work admitted clunky good word for it but this was a big change it's an enormous change in how we do things and uh thank you all for again for your forbearance on this and your assistance in getting us to goal let me ask if there is other business to come before the body today mr huffaker miss mr kandadi miss bush any other items to come before us today anything else right this would be the chance for someone to address the body on an item under our jurisdiction but not on today's agenda anyone wish to address the body i do i got an email from someone who was um he had two s e i u members who are attempting to speak during public comment on consent they were not able to get through one of them might have been the one that we kept hearing silence so if um i let him know that i would let you know that if any of them are on for oral communication they would be able to speak i've i've got to think about this because i think the rule here is not on our today's agenda now can you find a way mr kandadi for me to otherwise hear some comments from these folks and not call it oral communication i'm sorry but i was communicating with the city manager when the city clerk was explaining the situation let me see if we can do this uh if if the folks who are calling in can make their comments essentially generalized as opposed to speaking specifically to the item then i would be certainly willing to hear what they have to say under oral communication but i'm going to keep a bit of a short leash on this mr bush i have nobody online oh they didn't call back in thank you yeah they hung up when they didn't get through but they sent me an email that they couldn't get through and we're wondering if they'd be able to speak during oral communication so the answer is yes but they're not there and i had to i had to pass that info on okay we're good we're good well we fashioned a solution to a problem not there so that was uh that's really creative on our part all right anyone else let's go good afternoon uh yes uh this might be uh you know going too far with a third speech here but something bothered me about the last regular meeting uh which was when the mayor cut off and actually dismissed that person speaking at oral communications in the first meeting who had some ideas about approving democracy you have no right to do so while the council doesn't have to answer oral questions there's plenty of law ensuring the public sure can't ask pointed questions or demand answers and plenty of president questions do briefly get answered sometimes also the mayor should not be muscling the entire council's opinion or option i'm sorry to briefly answer the public questions sometime in the meeting and if the public speaks to the order of the meeting and he was i would ask you to respect the public solitary time and right to speak as well as council members the public speaks and the entire council should at least pretend to listen not read not talk not interrupt not tap their watches not walk out like that and most importantly not be dismissed by the mayor all of which most certainly did occur that meeting it's their time to be heard not yours schedule a bio break before public comment if one is needed since the city charter grants Santa Cruz almost limitless municipal legislative power subject only to state and federal law i also can't practically see speaking see how anyone could be prevented from speaking to almost anything make jurisdiction rules or not there was also a flavor of speech suppression given to the council about questions and what's the first thing out of their mouth should be and i didn't see a lot of heads nodding with the agreement asked for i get the ideas that the mayor was going for i would point out my observation the mayor seems to enjoy giving his own speeches like that seven-minute long one at the end of the last special meeting business where miss golder's motion to adjourn was snapped dismissed by the mayor so he could give another speech i've got no problem myself with concise concise speeches and better speeches of substance especially ones addressing the public specific concerns which we could actually use more thank you mr. Phillips appreciate your comments for the business to come before the body you have anyone else online one more two more hello hello appreciate your comments for the business to come before the body you have anyone else online yes two more mayor i will say their list they're watching it via community television and there's a delay or via our streaming and there's about a 22nd delay so they're here yes i will say their list they're watching it your community television and there's a delay or streaming and that's how delayed it is there we go hello council i wanted to address an item that was before you two weeks ago regarding the um the trees uh for the library project i appreciate that you moved to consider the appeal or you appealed it yourself in a way i guess with the all the other permits but i i think there's a lot of misinformation presented at that meeting um first of all of the 12 trees on the building site only nine of them are heritage trees seemed like the objectors are mostly focusing on the two liquid amherst of the two liquid amherst only one of the two is a heritage tree and the arborist report was mispoted really badly the arborist makes it clear that neither of those trees are in good health and um furthermore liquid amherst are not native to california and they're also considered by many communities to be a nuisance tree they're uh prohibited to be used as landscape trees in many communities all that being said what this is really about is trying to hobble the project which the the proponents of measure oh they they put for measure oh they got defeated soundly about two to one and this is just one more attempt for them to thwart the will of people and it's really not about trees it's because they don't like any building over two stories so i hope you can keep that all in mind when you do make your final determination um that um yeah that's all thank you very much well thank you very much thank you for calling in miss bush anyone else there's nobody else unless you want to try the other person again i think i think we're good i think we're good you when you say try that other person again the person who was on delay so we could well let's let's go ahead let's give it one more try out of an abundance of desire to hear from the public hello can you hear me we're well thank you uh my name is jackie griffith i've lived here as a community member homeowner teacher educator and highly interested in in our council in our city for 41 years and here is my concern it's we've seen in the recent storms and as pointed out in the january issue of scientific american on the ice melt and disintegration of the flows in Antarctica we cannot build ourselves we're committed as a charter to be a sustainable commitment community i'm not sure is it 30 by 2022 30 or 20 30 years at 35 but if we build the number of units that you are talking about and the number of units that you've already put on the table you will force us to do something with water supply which will cost tens of billion millions of dollars at least and as the ocean is rising so fast now and faster all the time because once this two year i mean two foot and and 10 year period is over it just it lets everything slide into the ocean from a much bigger flow of Antarctica and the next 10 feet will come we don't know how how long but two feet we have to do things even with our sewage treatment plant to protect it under storms and storm flows we aren't putting the money and the attention into that that must be there now may i continue please uh please uh 10 seconds more for you yes okay there's going to be so many superfund sites that flow into the ocean including medical nuclear that we cannot take out with diesel we are under the gun we have to plan to be we have to make the community work we can't have too many people that are at the top and not enough affordable housing because it increases the amount of people who have to commute and that increases the energy use even if it's electric it still increases the energy use and makes us unsustainable which is not our commitment as a community thank you so much thank you very much for your for your comment and the additional time you used it well thank you further for the business to come before the council miss bush for the business to come before the council seeing and hearing none a motion to adjourn would be in order miss golder moves and every council member seconds those in favor signify by saying aye motion carries and so ordered we stand adjourned recording stopped